ART & LANGUAGE: MICHAEL BALDWIN, CHARLES HARRISON AND MEL RAMSDEN
MB: We propose to talk about the possibility of painting with a certain background in view. We should make clear from the outset that by painting we do not just mean hand-made pictures. What we do and can mean may become clearer as we proceed. The background we have in mind is both theoretical and practical. The theoretical background takes the form of the so-called Institutional Theory, which has been virtually hegemonic within the art world for some forty years, determining upon people who in the majority have probably never heard of it.
CH: An informal version of the Institutional Theory was in circulation among certain artists, dealers and curators in the late 1950s, but it was given its first persuasive articulation by the philosopher Arthur Danto in 1964. Danto wrote of the end of art, meaning the end of an art governed by specific criteria and by specific notions of historical progress. It is now conventional wisdom that painting reached a terminus of sorts with the blank canvas. Danto and others following him marked the end of the developmental narrative of modernism with the problem of indiscernibles: objects, one of which is art and the other of which is not, and which cannot therefore be told apart except by reference to the different parts they play in the discourse of an art world. Danto mistakenly based his original argument on Warhol’s all-too distinguishable Brillo Boxes. It fits Duchamp’s snow shovel [In Advance of the Broken Arm, 1915] rather better. In fact we might say that at first sight the Institutional Theory is practically required by Duchamp’s first unassisted ready-made.
MR: The practical part of our background consists in real institutions, their concrete acts and occasions – this occasion among them. In talking of this as background, we do not wish to conflate the Institutional Theory with the practical artworld and its institutions. However, there is a connection in so far as the theory has been useful – indeed necessary in excess of its actual explanatory power – in supplying the institutions in question with their practical self-description. They need it to account to themselves for the power that they have come to wield over the status of objects as art.
CH: These are the conditions under which painting has to be conceived. We assert that painting also has to be conceived under the conditions that are mediated by Conceptual Art. Why is this the case? For two different reasons, each sustained by a different sense of what Conceptual Art is and means.
MB: According to one view, Conceptual Art is associated with the turn from modernism, conceived as an ideology of painting and sculpture, and with the advent of generic art with its accompanying and constituting institutional and managerial apparatuses. An alternative narrative is put in place which traces a ‘postmodernist’ diversification to the agendas ascribed to Marcel Duchamp: the hoc, the post hoc, and the propter hoc. It is this narrative that produces the current sense of Conceptual Art as a journalistic category born some time in the 1980s that designates promiscuously any art practice or form that is not painting or sculpture. Some of this stuff might be included in what we could call ‘good art’, but it shares in a globalised mélange of late Surrealism, pop art, process art, body art and so on, that has seen not only the empowerment of the curator but the reduction of the artist to the status of client – supplier of fuel to an ideological machine.
CH: We would argue that while this hoc, post hoc and propter hoc casts a real shadow and has real effects on the possibilities of painting, it entails a catastrophic misreading of the imaginative and critical possibilities that Conceptual Art promised. There is another hoc, post hoc and propter hoc. We should come clean and acknowledge that the hoc in question is in large measure our Conceptual Art – that is to say Art & Language’s. The particular post hoc we are trying to examine is painting. It remains to be seen whether this is our painting alone. It should be noted that the narrative in which painting designates a set of possibilities has to be discussed against a background of events that more or less excludes it. The second hoc is narrated against or rather in the midst of the first and better established one. What follows is that if we are to let our own work in somewhere, and if we are practically to envisage some continuation of painting, then we have first to dislodge the sense of Conceptual Art that would reduce it to epigones and descendants of the snow shovel.
MR: It might be objected that if Conceptual Art was about anything, then it was about not painting; that what we can admire about it is the intellectual challenge it represents. And the intellectual challenge exists in the form of texts and other banalities that eschew the aesthetic virtues that painting can avoid neither technically nor historically. With Conceptual Art, a way of thinking about art is invoked and is indexed and then migrates to the walls, where it murmurs away in Hegelian reflexivity.
CH: It is indeed true that Conceptual Art sought to put texts where paintings had been, and thus in a sense to displace them. It served to make the case that late modernism marked a real terminus for ‘authentic painting’ and that further modernist development was simply implausible. It did this in part by reminding painting of an intellectual substance and depth it might have owned in its pre-modernist past. It thus stood in the way both of a sentimental return to painting’s past and of any progress to a painterly postmodernism.
MB: It is also clear that the kind of Conceptual Art celebrated under the 1960s and 1970s rubric of ‘Demateralisation’ tended to reduce to the status of speciously transparent art world gesture. The complexity its admirers celebrated was usually generated in their own attempts to make sense of its opacities. Not that anyone cared much about this at the time. If it was post-Minimalism it was fine. This was part of what the background was made of then, and we all spent some time trying to see ourselves against it.
MR: But playing with language is playing with a big machine. And playing with language in the context of a tradition of painting is taking on a legacy of powerful descriptions – or it is unless you think that stringing a few words together is the next thing in art, while using a lot is falling out of art and into literature. For us, as Conceptual Art developed into an art of describing, what grew around it was a constituency of interlocutors – listeners and learners as much as speakers and producers. As it turned out, this was a threat to professional securities – for instance to the crucial distinction between artist and critic. But it was also here that the substantial connection was established between Conceptual Art and its syndicalised antecedents in painting. The text may have colonised the physical location of painting, but this text had to mean something – as painting had had to once. It had to be made, and not just be artily found – and the making at issue was a social and conversational pursuit.
MB: So we have an implied absence of painting. This absence was represented by the text in at least two possible ways. Firstly, the text was on the wall in some sense in place of the painting. Secondly, it stood in for or was an analogue for the modernist critical text that had come to dominate late – modernist painting – the writing that, as we have said, ‘might as well be put up on the wall’, since it had already come to function prescriptively in respect of that to which it was supposed to be subordinate. In a normal ‘ekphrasis’ we have ut pictura poesis. Here we have ut poesis pictura. It is as if the painting left the text with the remainder, and not vice versa. This is why Stella’s early paintings are so good. They threw the prescriptive text back at itself, reflecting upon their own status as insolent readings of the rules.
CH: Now once this was noticed – as it was in proto Art & Language around 1967 – painting tended to get subsumed under the describing that went on in Conceptual Art; and once that had happened it mattered rather less whether or not things got stuck up on the wall. The wall could be abandoned for the time being, as it were. It was not the presence of the inscriptions on the wall that now secured the dialectical relation to painting; it was an activity internal to the descriptive text in so far as that text was complex, discursive, recursive and representational. While it did not follow that Conceptual Art and paintings could therefore be established on categorically equivalent terms, there were minimum requirements of complexity and discursiveness in any text that aspired to the dialectic relation in question.
MR: ‘A square removal from a rug in use’ was not quite up to the job. Nor was ‘Something very near in place and time but not yet known to me’.
MB: We have argued against the characterization of Conceptual Art as essentially and irrevocably Duchampian, and gestural and appropriative – or as slavishly post-Minimal. It should be noted, though that it is through just such a characterisation that the Institutional Theory finds its most obvious justification. Here there are objects a-plenty – it doesn't much matter what – and it does indeed seem to be through the agency of the art world that they are accorded the status of artworks.
MR: But painting tends to be problematic for the Institutional theory. This is not because the art world doesn't or can't ratify them. But one of the capacities paintings seem to possess is to generate anomalies with respect to an exemplary case that the theory addresses; namely the problem of indiscernibility. There are in fact very few practical cases in which indiscernibility is a problem – and Danto notwithstanding, Warhol’s Brillo Boxes was not among them. We might conceive of blank paintings as things that need to have art status conferred upon them by the art world. But which blank paintings would we have in mind? Rauschenberg’s? Klein’s? Ryman’s? Richter’s? Do we actually have any difficulty in telling these apart from each other or from other things that are not paintings? It turns out that paintings have the cheek to look a bit like art whether the art world thinks they do or not.
CH: If this or some refined form thereof is not accepted we are left with an entirely uniform field of artworks – one in which there can be nothing intrinsic about x to tell us why we are paying attention to it. But the field of art works, as we know, is not yet uniform; the cases we confront are not all neat philosophers’ examples, and we don’t go about asking the same question of everything. We would even go so far as to say that the art world itself is not completely uniform. Not yet.
MR: In. fact the more uniform the art world gets, the more terrifying it is. We might say that it is, trying these days to become more uniform – to establish curatorial power plus. If every other thing Tate Modern shows is stretching the boundaries of art, what is the nature of the boundary that is being stretched, and what properties are ascribed to the things doing the stretching? The point is that if there were really infinite numbers of items waiting at the disputed edge of art for the art world to confer status on them, few or none of them could be paintings.
MB: Painting seems to be of interest because it may act As an irritant to a central doctrine of institutional theory. The Institutional Theory is, we argue, founded on a Gedanken experiment that bases itself on the example of Duchamp’s snow shovel, while painting conceived in a certain way refuses to be exemplified by the artefact of which that is a type. This example is supposed to cover all art. If it did, the idea of a generic art would indeed follow naturally. In Joseph Kosuth’s formulation, generic art develops through critical operations on the concept of art; you cannot if you are making painting or sculpture be questioning the concept of art since they are merely fixed kinds of art, i.e., mere subsets of the generic class. In this world, painting is either an authenticist anachronism or it is one postmodern option among many.
CH: The Conceptual Art careers that were built on Duchampian foundations were like their postmodernist reflections, somehow bound tightly or loosely to the various legends of the end of art. What these notions tell us is that we can break with the formal traditions of history – or, rather, that we can break with the idea that forms are connected with and borne forth in traditions that have some historical meaning or saturatedness. History and historicism are abandoned in favour of a certain simultaneity. The various senses of order, sequentiality and periodicity can thus be abandoned. We are now, it seems, sure that artistic forms are not at all bound to the context of their emergence – and that they do not need to overcome them, for example. We can divorce things from their historical context and put them in any arbitrary combination.
MB: It is a surprise to no one that this supposed, freeing of art from the need to find its historicity in a dialogue with the self-image of the age was in fact no such thing. The cancellation of the distinction between map and territory has itself acquired a Spenglerian and an epochal character. This is the self-image of the age and it has seen not the end of art and of art history, but the inscription of these both in and as a narrative of institutional powers.
MR: You can do anything: take a photograph, stick some stuff in a box, do a painting, anything, because everything is art in the same way. This is seen as anti-elitist and the democratisation of art. What it effectively does, however, is to empower the institution to make the selections that get to count while it masks its own non-cognitive operations with circularity. We will come to this in more detail later. It seems to us an odd democratisation
that as more and more is distributed across the net of art and doesn’t have to answer for itself, the success or failure of work gets harder directly to determine. The development of criteria in this connection becomes very uncertain, and falls easily into the hands of the manager and the therapist.
MB: If all things are possible, then it will be necessary to tighten the criteria for selecting what is admissible or good or relevant or edifying or whatever. The question we face is how do we select? As Niklas Luhmann says, only the overcoming of difficulties makes a work significant. As he goes on to say, Hoc opus hic labor est. It’s that bit of Virgil that we have tried to keep in our minds. Expansion without discomfort, without scepticism and without some source of paradox and anomaly does not increase the realm of meaning; what it has tended to increase is the power the institution wields to make of its self-description the demand of the epoch.
CH: What’s confusing is that submission to that power can seem commensurate with liberation from posh talk about inherent quality, and from the idea that art status is decided by empirically verifiable visual properties. In the late 1960s this sense of liberation released a certain appropriative gesture into the world. But this appropriative gesture faced the critique that it was still Cartesian in its artwork ontology. If perception and description were often the same thing as the later Wittgenstein suggested, then a conversation had to take over. Conversation tends to generate projects for itself. It imagines its ‘objects’ as always problematic, (always) deflated and deflating. (This is perhaps the beginning of a sense of resistance also to another programme that we have described as bureaucratic, managerial and spectacular.)
MB: In the form of the doctrine of indiscernibles, the Institutional Theory argues that the status of art is conferred upon objects by the art world. There are thus still objects that somehow lie ‘behind’ the artwork, however installed, evasive and dematerialised they may be. Here is an instance of Cartesian theatre, the machine behind the artwork’s ghost. Perception and description are pulled apart. In the case of the snow shovel we are supposed to perceive a snow shovel and describe it as a work of art. But in the case of a painting of even minimal internal complexity, our address to it will tend to obliterate a Cartesian object in the background, even if we allow the implicit ontology to linger. If an object is an artwork under description as such, then certain worrying if consequences easily follow. It is as if David Beckham’s free-kick against Greece [for England in a World Cup qualification match] had to be thought of as a perceived bodily movement, a knee jerk, that has been placed under the description of the scoring of a goal. Our argument is, of course, that the scoring of the goal and David Beckham’s action are not intelligibly separated. We would say that even painting of a traditional authenticist type has the power to point to the Cartesian pitfalls of the Institutional Theory of art objects.
CH: It should be allowed, though, that the Institutional theory does often have its uses. It frees us from looking for empirical features or family resemblances that are somehow shared by works of art – the art-historian’s tedious compare-and-contrast exercises as the key to all significance – and suggests that in the matter of art status we had better be engaged in some form or other of conceptual analysis.
MR: If a possibly and increasingly rare and hard-to-think-of controversial object has had art status conferred upon it, then we might say that the contextually needed conferral is parasitic upon, if it is not grounded in, relatively non-problematic cases. But this does not mean that these ‘grounds’ are justified or defended in the same way. ‘If the true is what is grounded, then the ground is not true nor yet false.’ Someone might ask, ‘Are you telling me that this scruffy and unskilled bit of scrawling is art in the same way as Ingres’ drawings are art?’ You say, ‘Yes.’ He says, ‘On what grounds?’ You say, ‘I can’t give you grounds, but if we keep talking you might agree.’ If this didn’t happen, you might say that the questioner couldn’t or wouldn’t learn about art and art history in the twentieth century – or something.
CH: Similarly, if we find out that for all its faults Art & Language’s Documenta Index is a rather serious business, we do not have to know that there is something that exists that is called ‘the art world’. The existence of art – that is to say art works, Conceptual Art and its place in the world and so on – is what will tell us that the Documenta Index might be a work of art, even if we care little for the information.
MB: Neither of these instances draws on the need for an institutional conferral of status. Now if the Institutional theory can penetrate only so far into the Documenta Index, then this will have something to do with an internality that it shares with painting – even as analogue or ghost. While the Index does not have the impertinence to look like art, it partakes at a distance of painting’s capacity to generate anomaly for the Institutional Theory, of its pre-eflective capacity to create its own context, to be ‘seen’ to act autopoetically, to resist contextualisation and yet to know a little about it.
MR: Painting is not only a problem for Institutional Theory, it holds within it a possible critique of those real institutions that use the theory and that constitute the world into which paintings are uttered. There is a non-professional tradition both in the production and the consumption and display of paintings. We may well dismiss (some) of these objects as bibelots, but there is little doubt that the non-professional tradition exists and that we might as well call its constituents ‘art’, just in case. Yet one of the more telling things about painting, with regard to the matter of conferred status as art, is that we are often either quite unconscious or unselfconscious as to its status as art at all. We might say that we go straight to the painting in a cognitive style that is more or less unable in its language game to think of the object behind it. We are freed from reflections upon the art world and its conferring power by the very boundedness of many paintings – by our tendency to assign them an autonomy that is the analogue of moral personality.
CH: Imagine showing somebody a painting by, Jackson Pollock. You would be acting unintelligibly if you tried to get them to perceive the object that the Pollock is and then to think of its unexhibited character as a work of art. You would also be acting oddly if you tried to explain that it was a work of art because the art world deemed it so. You would be more likely to say that it was a painting and that it possessed certain properties and that these had some connection with criteria for calling it a work of art – this because a certain agreement existed in the matter. This would then, in the end, involve an ‘institutional’ pragmatics. Works of art can only be works of art as perceived and described things whose classification is somehow 'agreed'.
MB: What we are saying, perhaps, is that the pragmatic route that invokes agreement as to the art status of most paintings is such that the status is in fact invoked in the perception-description inter alia and not as a description sundered from the description of the object. Of course we don’t say that all (or any) painting is entirely immune to contextualisation. This can and indeed does confer status, but the status conferred is not necessarily art status – not at least in any way in which we can seriously imagine conferral.
MR: It is hard, for instance, to imagine someone nowadays asserting to any serious purpose, that Velasquez’s Las Meninas is a work of art. We might say that from its lofty vantage point Las Meninas is sceptical about the power of an institution to confer status on it as art. It outranks the institution, as it were – and we don’t just mean the Prado or its other contents. By analogy, we might argue that there are things or activities, sceptical and existing at a different ‘social altitude’, that can never be explicitly ratified, but which might be of interest in ways that are at least analogous to the ways that Las Meninas is. The institution may merely ‘outrank’ them. They operate on the institution in ways that it can't account for –ways that it can’t assimilate.
CH: Las Meninas refuses to be institutionally aufgehebt. From its lofty position, it is subversive of the institution’s conferring power. There is a sense, however, in which it is not mere loftiness that makes it do the subverting work. So far as the institution is concerned, it is perhaps at too vulgarly aesthetic a level to be of critical interest. But this very vulgarity may be productive of some scepticism vis-à-vis the prospect of institutional assimilation. If we try to think of things that evince an analogously subversive or sceptical property but from a position that does not outrank the institution but is outranked by it, then we may run into trouble. The history of the avant-garde is stuffed with assimilated provocations. Indeed, it is a mere commonplace to say that it would be hard to find an act or item dirty enough or low enough as to be finally inadmissible to the institutional picturesque and thence to be an object of conferred status. Low is not exactly where we should look for scepticism.
MB: One possible place to look might be into a world with an unassailable, and from the institutional perspective, banal aesthetic. Take engineering artefacts. Let’s say that the old six-cylinder-in-line BMW engine is a rather satisfying thing to look at; even beautiful. It was very durable and looks it, and so on. Here is a sort of ‘aesthetic’ that connected to purpose – is unKantian in its origins, but in its nerdy way nevertheless aesthetic. We might say that this nerdy aesthetic protects the object from a certain institutional ratification. There is, certainly, no way that it can be assimilated in accordance with institutional theory as mad-artist’s-cum-self-publicist’s-cum-avant-gardist’s charter. The aesthetic operation in relation to the car engine stays just below the condition – or is it very slightly above it? It can’t be rescued by the institution in ways that would allow its aesthetic to be mapped onto that of the institution. And this has something to do with the car engine’s internal complexity. Its informal aesthetic has, as it were, a life of its own that makes it resistant to and sceptical of assimilation. It is possible, perhaps, to think of certain painting as rooted in its domestic occasions and as similarly resistant.
CH: Another engineering example comes to mind concerning Anish Kapoor’s Marsyas. We might say of this enterprise that the work of the engineers and riggers is admirable, and might mean this in a sense that could be understood as aesthetic. This would be to configure the work in an implicitly sceptical description. The institution presumably had something more in mind. That something more provides conditions of assimilation as the vulgar something less does not.
MR: We might ask if such cases have any possible analogues in the realm of painting or possible painting? We have said that paintings are, in some regards, institutionally unsightly in theoretical terms. We are now concerned with their practical resistance. It is not an unfamiliar objection to a mixed show of paintings and installations that the show was bad but the paintings taken individually were OK, were good, and so forth. In this case, the paintings’ standing out has nothing in principle to do with their being mediated by Conceptual Art or not. They may be ‘authentic’ in a way that Conceptual Art forecloses. The example, in other words, is not quite good enough. If we are to imagine painting subversive of institutional power, then it will have to take examples like that into its self-description – into its aboutness. They will have to be paintings that know about the infra-institutional or extra-institutional life of the paintings in the example but are unable directly to claim such status. This may mean, for example, that they hide their infra-institutional autonomy and internality in apparent forms – installations – that are client to institutional power. Another way to hide is as text – but text configured so that it is recovered as pictorial detail as much as read, paintings that malinger, hide their faces and lose their looks, and know that they are at best the asymptotes of a scandalous circle.
CH: It turns out that in the form in which we have been discussing it, the institutional theory cannot avoid an obsession with art-status. But what if we were not so bothered with the issue? An apparently plausible defence of the Institutional theory does indeed agree that the question of whether or not a thing is a work of art is trivial. The significant question to ask is of the form, ‘Is it a good work of art?’ The question, ‘What is a good work of art?’ is thus detached from the question, ‘What is a work of art?’ This might sound like a kind of relaxed pragmatism. But if it turns out that we’re dependent on some authority within the art world for our understanding of what is a good or bad work of art, then we're just back where we were within the Institutional Theory’s particular kind of circularity.
MB: It seems likely that that’s exactly where we are, since if we consider what kind of examples a real pragmatism would produce, the answer is that they would unquestionably be of a kind that the artworld would find intolerable: David Shepherd’s elephants, perhaps, for the internalists’ reason that the eyes follow you round the room.
MR: We are now at the parting of the ways. Our argument thus far is that a painting is something typically possessed of internal complexity, such that it does not reduce to a contextual object. Thus conceived, painting may be resistant to certain central doctrines of Institutional theory, and may show them to be counter-intuitive and Cartesian. We also argue that painting of any kind must labour under the shadow or perhaps in the light of Conceptual Art. If the Institutional Theory is true regarding the centrality of the case of the Duchampian readymade, and, if indeed the blank canvas is an instance of that case, and, further, if the theory of indiscernibles is applicable to art tout court, then painting doesn’t have much of a problem. It can either be an absurd craft anachronism or be post-modern. Either way, it’s harmless.
MB: Our argument regarding Conceptual Art is that it developed into an art of describing, and that at the margin of that describing was a practice of painting that Conceptual Art had not
at all rendered generic. We suggest that it is its possible resistance to the genericist’s reduction that makes painting worth bothering with. We do not take this apparent resistance for granted, though. It is rather that there is a constructive pleasure in painting conceived as the anomaly that besets institutional theory. Of course painting is also itself beset – or aufgehebt – by Institutional theory. Painting must always live with the possibility of reduction to the status of ordinary object among others. Our point is rather that one possible mode for trying to think about painting lies in such apparently broken-down – even philistine – statements as, ‘Well, you can tell a painting is art by looking at it.’ This goes even for most real blank canvases. That's because of something that’s internal to them, and that is not reducible to their relations to a given context.
CH: We might even say that Danto himself is not entirely dazzled by the transfiguration of the ordinary, nor wholly immune to the recalcitrance of, painting. He may admire the snow shovel and the misperceived Brillo Boxes but in life as opposed to theory he’d take a Chardin or a Morandi if he were given the choice. Isn’t that one way or another because of their internal complexity – because, rather than raising questions of status conferral that are marooned in Cartesian theatre, they remind us of the advantages of keeping perception and description together?
MR: Perhaps it is easier to do this with regard to those things we might conceive of living with, rather than those we can only visit in museums. We don’t say that painting belongs only in the first category and generic art only in the second, but we do say that the antagonisms between them are disturbingly shadowed by considerations such as these. On the question of the relations between painting and generic art, there is no last word. The force of the question will in any event vary according to cultural, curatorial and economic circumstances.
MB: While painting may put up a sceptical and vulgar fight against reduction to the generic condition, it may not follow that a form or forms of painting that labour in the shadow of Conceptual Art are capable of such untidy behaviour. It might be argued that in so far as Conceptual Art does indeed finally implement the Duchampian generic condition, then anything that plays in its shadow – or more dubiously in its light – must be ipso facto generic.
CH: Our response to this argument is that not all Conceptual Art was generic-type art tout court, and that its reflection in painting is thus similarly non-generic.
MR: It might further be argued, however, that to say that texts began to occupy the place of painting is actually to say very little beyond the fact that (some of) these text-objects achieved the conferred status of art objects. After all, no one really believes coherently that works of Conceptual Art consisted of no more than ideas or ‘meanings’ reducible in some form to an artist's intention. They have to be something, after all.
MB: But matters were not as simple as this argument proposes. While it is true to say that it all began with a sort of declaring – a sort of appropriating – for us, as things went on, the declaring began to reflect upon itself. To be satisfied with the thought that the nominatings and declarings were in any way transparent seemed a disservice to realism. It seemed also to undermine the possibility that there might be ontological consequences for the art object in
conceptual art. There was something both arrogant and absurd in thinking of the mere gesture or fiat of nomination or appropriation as any more than an artsy Cartesian romance – a comfortable relation between artist and imagined object. Such problems arose systemically as the ontological range of possible objects expanded.
MR: The illocutionary act of appropriation-cum-ostension – usually in the form of a brief description – had expanded into a more elaborate act of describing. And on it went, until the art object all but disappeared in favour of the description and the discursive development of that description. This was – as we have said – a necessarily sociable and conversational activity. Its forms were internally complex even if they were composed of philosophical fragments and bits of wreckage.
CH: Conceptual art insinuates text. Not necessarily as painting, but so as to make painting and text fight it out for the status of ‘origin’. In saying this we do not intend to suggest that the text and the picture by which it is mediated are in anything like the relation between a description and the instantiation that satisfies it. If we describe a possible painting and somebody then makes a painting treating the text as its ‘specification’, the result will not be the exhaustive satisfaction of the text by the painting or the exhaustion of the painting by the text.
MB: In suggesting that the hoc of Conceptual Art was conceivable as an art of describing, we are not arguing that text then had to dominate – or even appear on – the surfaces of paintings, but rather that it could no longer be ‘naturally’ excluded, and further that, in any case, paintings were now in some shadowy way mediated by text (or some other descriptive form).
CH: So, we have the possibility of language-mediated non-authentic painting uttered into what has become a context-rich culture. For let us not forget that the other quite real and determining hoc of Conceptual Art has empowered the development of the installation, and with it a grasping of (or gadarene obsession with) the power of the institution to act as the switch or condition of certain interpretative themes and possibilities and what are quaintly called ‘modes of attention’. The little contexts that are paintings now have to seek a place in bullying curator-and-architect-and-sponsor-built contexts. These are often not contexts that serve as Gofmann suggests to ‘condense expectations’, but rather contexts that dominate production and effects.
MB: It might well be thought that an appropriate function for an institutional theory would be to show the mechanism of this domination. How the theory actually performs, however, is to protect the illusion that the curatorial quantification of anything and everything that can fit on a Deleuzian matrix is an emancipatory extending of boundaries.
MR: We might want to object that it’s all very well going on about this as if it’s a philosopher's puzzle. Is it not likely that these problems now lie somewhere else: that it's not the ‘art’ that’s important in ‘art status’ but the ‘status’? Prime management stuff, just stack it next to ‘celebrity’. The description has been removed from the object and people have run off with ... with what? With the concept no doubt.
MB: There are social and historical forces at work supporting, promoting and celebrating this work, and indeed in supporting the celebrity that sort-of produces it. Its history is among other things a narrative of the globalisation of meaning in the world media-scape. Here immediately are some problems for painting – or if they are not within its purview, it is simply harmless. Quite how painting might address them seems to rest on whether somehow they ought to be resisted – even modestly. If they are resisted, then the history of painting will eventually go to a history of dissenting forms of art, not just to the canonical history of painting.
CH: This is to suggest a relationship painting might have with Conceptual Art’s original sense of itself. We’re trying to get to this relationship by describing Conceptual Art as like painting in that it does not have to be in its nature to wait anxiously for the status of art to be conferred on it. It is necessary to try to explain this and, as you will have noticed, it’s not very straightforward. Paintings (or rather pictures – it’s often hard to see the difference) usually have some significant internal, technical, symbolic, iconographical detail which belongs to a tradition of other comparable things.
MB: There is a history of production, of sorts. This history is bound up with such properties as family resemblances and discernibility. Had things stayed like this, the Institutional Theory would have been slow in coming – if it came at all. It came with the snow shovel and the Conceptual Art that followed it, however unwillingly. It shed light on painting. One question that we can ask in our current sense of crisis is whether painting can now shed light on the institution – and do this without reversion to the old habits of looking for family resemblances.
MR: Suppose we look back to painting’s moment of high insecurity in the mid-1960s. Minimal art actually took its cues from painting, but it established a kind of literalism in defiance of what Donald Judd derogated as ‘European relational painting’. To do this it had to be installed in institutions that protected its place with a kind of social decorum. If it was in an art gallery it was art and if it wasn’t other ways of drawing attention to it had to be devised – magazines, publicity and texts. Arthur Danto was not alone in operating an institutional theory. He was simply its more persuasive and elegant exponent. Don Judd, for example, gave it an individualistic – almost solipsistic cast in the form of the dictum: ‘If someone says it’s art it’s art’.
MB: This was liberation of a sort for all of us. Quickly however it appeared as an empty yet simultaneously imperialistic assertion of the new professionalism of the artist. Next to the objects of minimalism, the minimalist paintings of Jo Baer, David Novros and others now forgotten just looked displaced and sad. For a while the blank canvas seemed like a goer. Everyone tried their hand at it, including us, though its admittedly marginal internality seemed to turn its back on the possibilities that minimal sculpture appeared to disclose. In the ensuing theatre, the conditions for an avant-garde arms race were created. The advent of Conceptual Art had the effect of stifling it, however. It took a few years for this professionalised psychosis to re-emerge, pumped-up by money and management.
MR: One way to describe this phenomenon is as Wagnerian neurosis, another is to say that it is a trajectory built into the later twentieth-century logic of the avant-garde: an art seeking constantly to surpass itself. In the words of Niklas Luhmann, however, ‘If art’s condition is
to constantly surpass itself, then eventually there has to be some reflection on art having constantly to surpass itself’. Conceptual Art, perhaps in our specific and admittedly limited understanding of it, can be understood as such a reflection. In the 1960s and early 1970s Conceptual artist were often called ‘word men’ by their traditionalist tormenters. Given the reification of Conceptual Art, through the Institutional theory and the legacy of minimalist theatre, we face the need not for a reflection of art’s self-surpassing – a forestalling of its imminence – but a reflection upon art’s practical self-image as such.
CH: As art appeared in the 1960s to emancipate itself from all apparent questions of medium-specificity, it faced the unacknowledged paradoxes and mystifications of its naive sense of dematerialisation. The work still had to be made and presented somehow. The practical circumstances of this ‘emancipation’ could not be sustained in the hypostasising jargon of meaning. The other hoc of Conceptual art developed a critical life of sorts and either sucked in or excluded professional critics. It faced redescription in an ‘internalistic’ conversation that tended to produce anomaly in respect of institutional closure.
MR: We have an example in mind. It is a ‘work’, if it may be so called, named Frameworks. It is a lengthy, fragmented and difficult set of speculations, arguments and assertions as to how a column of air could be identified and defended as a work of art or not. But a column of air could be described in many ways. You couldn’t easily point to it. Immediately the problem of the ‘metaphysical’ location of the work of art was encountered. Was it a column of air or was it a sort of fictional entity? Was it the argument, the ‘theory’ and speculation or the text? The object was being made by the text. Its independence as an art object was being eroded. Many of the dematerialised clichés of post-minimalism are present but the art object risks the condition of mere ‘as if’ insofar as the object – turns into text and the conventional powers of the artist are transformed into those of a participant in discursive talk.
MB: The journalistic use of the term Conceptual Art to designate any art that isn’t painting or sculpture or that otherwise lacks a material tradition is a largely British – that is to say provincial – perversion. In fact it is not quite true of such stuff that it lacks a tradition. Much of it amnesically repeats the form or look of some Conceptual Art of the 1960s and ‘70s. These concepts without percepts have, however, discovered their modus vivendi in an asocial matrix not of Deleuze but of public relations. Their mediate origin lies in the Britain of the 1980s – the Britain of the Thatcher junta. Indeed, to describe this stuff as a modus vivendi is perhaps to stumble on the reality. In their most celebrated form, works of high art like Conceptual Art have acquired the character of mere traces – one might say accidental or arbitrary indices. These are the arbitrary or idle traces of the lives of artistes sans oeuvre, artists without a body of work. Work is the manipulated material of public relations.
CH: The trouble is, the artists in question are not Arthur Cravans. Their function is social. They represent the revenge of the petty bourgeoisie upon the Marxian and highbrow modernity from which they felt excluded. The artists sans oeuvre have in fact been given the job of rendering the whole system middle-brow. The unreflective but lifestyle-sensitive consumer will absorb almost anything that’s been mediated by a journalistic agency. The non-oeuvres of provocative enfants terribles consumed as colourful culture. But it’s no good if it doesn’t do the Benetton job.
MB: Of course there are many artists with ‘substantial’ – all too substantial – oeuvres. We are not suggesting that all post-conceptual artists – or artists with post-conceptual careers –are sans oeuvre. What we can say is that they share a certain practical Weltanschauung with the latter. They have seen that their post-conceptual future is, in the sceptics view, not only to make too much of too little, but to mask triviality in Albert Speer’s cathedral of ice. This helps both the police of one-idea purism, and – paradoxically – those creative souls who are assisting in the lowering of art’s improbability.
MR: What we mean is this. If art is as the work of Niklas Luhmann suggests, an ostentatiously improbable occurrence, then this must be due to the fact that there are some undetermined spaces, beyond the reach of ordinary causal explanation, that require interpretative work. The purpose of the institution is largely to silence that work in favour of interpretation according to institutionally favourable protocol, and thereby to reduce improbability.
MB: That’s the point about the spectacular mediascape: a high level of redundancy and consequently high probability. Given a Spenglerian characterisation of the demands of the epoch, how often does a calculated response have to be repeated before a sense of the age gets replaced by a sense of the epidemic - by a diagnosis of cultural pox?
MR: An apparently – and no doubt appallingly – obvious solution to the danger of being thus overwhelmed by institutional power is actually to withdraw into authenticist painting; or at least to withdraw into the antique language of inner necessity and its cognates. But this possibility is foreclosed by Conceptual Art, which has reconfigured painting in the genetic character of the text, and has thus also prefigured it. Any authentic form is therefore already described in and as an attenuated fiction.
CH: But careful. This could nevertheless be to describe nothing more than a postmodern sequence – an account of how painting gains admission to the generic world of irony and anything goes. We are trying to say that while Conceptual Art may serve to deprive painting of its authenticity, it does not reduce such self-contextualising power as painting may retain without it. The puzzle is how that power might now actually be exercised – and exercised in a world where such powers are suspect if they are admitted at all. The answer seems to be that in so far as its self-contextualising power has been retained, painting survives through a kind of malingering. If the ordinary object is upraised, installed in the museum and transfigured by the art-world’s attention, then painting, already crippled by a mediating agency, but still bravely and quietly possessed of its memories and virtues, refuses the upraising effect or renders it in large measure otiose.
MB: In the end the Duchampian moment may just mean that some internalist objects are a bit beleaguered. Perhaps it is through its very beleaguered state that the internalist object can defeat or undermine the power of the institution. Perhaps it is through its internal complexity that it can both reveal and resist the arbitrariness and ultimately the vacuity and coercive power of the institutional reality. Artworks are recursively self-describing and, insofar as they are interpreted, can mean almost anything that Humpty Dumpty wants. We have to work critically – that is to say transformatively – at the conditions in which that is so. What can art do to resist? Tighten the criteria; go ‘inward’ and make it hard for the Institutional theory to invoke Duchamp’s putative legacy without embarrassment. More to the point, make it hard for the reality that that theory contingently represents to set the conversational agenda. Make work that can fight for its moral and political rights. That means that art not only has internality, it means that it does have a reflexive description, a sense of its own project. This will be a question of what the work does and what the artist does.
CH: We are desperately in need of a degree of vulgarisation. We need either to expand ad infinitum our sense of the institution and the ways objects are manipulated in or as or by it – a solution that puts the power into the hands of an already discredited management – or we need to recognize that if there is a crisis it is a crisis of real institutions. The samizdat is often – but, of course, not always – in a frame. What we mean by this is that it is possible that under conditions of mediation and restraint, painting in some form may well be a medium of resistance. The basis of this resistance lies not only in the fact that painting supplies anomaly in respect of many attempts at an Institutional theory, but also in the fact that painting itself is capable of resisting the power of the institution. Its possible internality in every sense is the key to that.
MR: If there is a crisis in the arts, it is a crisis produced by the institutional ordering and management of art. For this reason, painting is surely worth a try. Concentrate, throw away the commuter’s pass and go somewhere. On our analysis, painting perhaps stands in relation to the rest of art as singing a song stands to the rest of music.
CH: In the words of Samuel Beckett: ‘Quand on est dans la merde jusqu’au cou, il ne reste plus qu'à chanter’.
MR: ‘If you’re in the shit up to your neck, the only thing you can do is sing.’
MB: There’s certainly good reason not to dance.
This article is a version of a paper given in March 2003 as part of the public events series Painting Present, a collaboration between Tate Modern and the School of Fine Art at Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design.
Tate Papers Spring 2004 © Art and Language
Tate's groundbreaking music and visual art project continues at Tate Modern. December sees the launch of the unique track by Klaxons, inspired by Donald Judd's imposing 'stack', Untitled 1980. Check it out in Tate Modern from 1 December. Online at tatetracks.org.uk from 1 December you can hear The Chemical Brothers vs. Jacob Epstein, Roll Deep vs. Anish Kapoor and Graham Coxon vs. Franz Kline.
Call for submisionBuilding on last year's publishing success -Art Addiction 100 Contemporary Artists and FAMOUS 120 Contemporary Artists in which 320 artists included two acclaimed global art books, World of Art has decided to augment its global art book series with a third global art title - Masters of Today, a book not only about art but about the development in art to create art history.
Particularly by publishing the artworks value increase by at least 500%, on the other hand the published artists are selling their work. Masters of Today will also serve as a resource and referral source for museums and galleries seeking new artists, to art collectors, consumers and art lovers. The marketing and distribution is through more than 7,500 large bookstores and eCommerce channels including Barnes and Noble, Borders, Amazon, Powell’s, Alibis, Books-A-Million and many others worthwhile.ThE selectionWe welcome quality works from qualified artists. A warm welcome to Photography. The inclusions are judged solely by visuals (.TIFF /.JPG image files) submitted as e-mail attachment (send to: firstname.lastname@example.org.)
All selected artists will be included in the book from single page to two-page spread, from 3 to 6 works, up to 500 words of critic essay or statement, the artist photo and website. Each included artist will receive free 3 copies of the book.
Lightfastness - Early inkjet prints in the mid 1990’s were disappointingly fugitive with noticeable fading occurring quite quickly. Dramatic improvements have been made in the inks used and the paper or canvas substrate. It was found that it is crucial that the combination of machine, ink-set and substrate is compatible and tested as a whole. Recent tests show that the resulting print can be lightfast to very high levels with a minimum of six on the Blue Wool test, or 25 years by Wilhelm Institute tests. The latest test results show life expectancy rates of 100 to 200 years for some giclée prints. When printed on good quality heavyweight art paper the print should possess archival standards of permanence comparable or better than other collectable artwork.
Quality - The visual quality of the print result is extremely high with seeming continuous tone prints without dots, lines or barring. The colour saturation and definition can be stunning.
Benefits and disadvantages - One advantage that digital printing offers to the artist and publisher is that the edition can be printed on demand. Giclée images are recorded as a digital file and can be produced on a giclée printer singly, or more, whenever required. The prints will be exactly the same at the start and end of a print run, even if the run is interrupted and printed on different occasions. This means that the high cost and risk of producing a complete print edition all at once is avoided. A second advantage to the artist and publisher is the control available by manipulation of the digital file. Using special software it is possible to tweak and alter the original image to improve the size, colour, tone and other qualities of the image. It is also possible to design or create the print image completely on a computer using designer software such as Adobe PhotoShop, thus producing effects that could not be hand made in the studio using paint or ink. However, the costs per giclée print are quite high because the paper, ink machinery and specialist time involved are expensive. The machines are very slow often taking an hour to print one A0 print sheet. The machines can cost £50,000.00 and the paper may be £10 a sheet.
Update latest information - There has been a rapid increase in bureau services offering giclée quality print facilities to self-publishing artists, galleries and fine art publishers. Most of the established print houses are experiencing full order books, while some others are not offering the service any more. Many new bureau services have appeared with a variety of background experiences. Potential giclée publishers have a wide range of expertise to choose from, with some bureau services offering specialism such as giclée for photography. Machine manufacturers are continually producing new large format and desktop machines for commercial print house or small office/studio. In July 1990 Epson presented their desktop size photo-style printer the 2000P. Costing about £600 plus VAT, the 2000P produces giclée quality [6 colour at 1440 dpi] prints at A3+ size. Epson claim 100 -200 year lightfast results for these prints using their own paper. A new RIP [computer software commanding the printer] is promised which will assist the 2000P to print on the heavier Hahnemuhle paper range with similar longevity. But, this has already been upstaged with the forthcoming Epson 5500, promising faster printing at 2800 dpi, also using 6 colour pigment inkset. With so many more combinations of machine, ink and paper available, test results are not always available for the latest prints, but 99.9% of pigmented inksets are now scoring extremely high in blue wool tests.
Conclusion - The effect of print-on-demand production will increasingly affect the quantity and quality of published art images as more artists publish “giclée” editions. Galleries will have more choice and the collecting public should be stimulated by wider choice and better quality art. Publishers will be freed from the necessity to hold large stocks. Giclée prints are a radically new way that artists can produce art, publishers can supply art, and museums, galleries and collectors can display or own high quality art.
Introducing the next generation of art
A revolutionary fusion of art and design, acrylicize... drags canvas into the 21st Century, creating modern artworks which are set to be the hot addition to homes, clubs and bars in 2007.
Currently being snapped up by celebrities like George Michael, bars such as ISIS, hotels like The Cumberland, and premiership football clubs like Arsenal, acrylicize has become the must have artwork for any space.
The acrylicize B.I.D.A award winning concept blurs the boundaries between art and design. Aluminium fixings embellished with acrylicize’s trademark seal holds the image away from the wall allowing light to permeate, creating a 3D effect. Acrylicize’s product has won them international industry recognition, and their success stems from the quality of their product and unique expertise. They offer a range of bespoke services catering for the individual as well as corporate clients, resulting in them being the foremost supplier of the acrylic canvas in the UK.
There's a new screensaver slideshow of my work which you can download for free. It uses FlickR and SlickR which as you know - FlickR is now really big and a great way to share your photography, art, digital media etc. SlickR allows you to create a screensaver slideshow out of a FlickR members images.
OK, here's what to do:
1) First click here to download the SlickR program.When prompted, simply save it to your desktop or somewhere easily accessible.
2) Install the program by double clicking on the SlickR icon on your desktop.SlickR installs itself automatically.
3) Once SlickR is installed as your screensaver, you will see an "options" button in your settings panel. Just add "Paul Cooklin" (without the quotes) as the user.
Thats it, you're done.
If you have any problems, just let me know.
Join the Gallery
If you would like to promote your own artwork, join the PaulCooklin.com artists directory. The site is viewed by art lovers, large and small collectors, museum curators, art gallery owners and exhibition organisers, art students, artists and art historians.
We will create you your own artist page, with artist portrait and personal information, with the possibility of 5 links to resources: to your homepage, gallery website, online exhibitions and other related websites. Plus 10 images of works, with biography, artist statement, interview and exhibition reviews. Your profile will also be emailed with our newsletter to the PaulCooklin.com mailing list which will give you greater exposure.
12 months listing Up to 10 Images (max 300 pix wide)
Up to 5 links
Included in our emailer
GBP 50.00 / $90.00
To join the gallery, please send 2-3 sample images (JPG's) of your work to: mailto:email@example.com
The 1960s and 1970s were groundbreaking decades in which independent filmmakers challenged cinematic convention. In England, much of the innovation took place at the London Film-Makers' Co-operative, an artist-led organisation that enabled filmmakers to control every aspect of the creative process. LFMC members conducted an investigation of celluloid that echoed contemporary developments in painting and sculpture.
Friday 10 November - Saturday 11 November
Shoot Shoot Shoot: Programme One
Friday 10 November, 19.00Tate Modern, Starr Auditorium
£4, booking recommended
Find out more
Book onlineShoot Shoot Shoot: Programme Two
Saturday 11 November, 19.00Tate Modern, Starr Auditorium
£4, booking recommended
Find out moreBook online
At the beginning of 2005, Frank Warren launched a new blog called PostSecret as an experiment in community art, inviting strangers to mail him anonymous postcards that made art out of their innermost secrets and then posting a selection of the cards every week on his blog. Within a year, his blog was one of the five most popular in the world, and his first book, PostSecret, was one of the surprise bestsellers of 2005. My Secret is his second book, a collection of cards from teens and college students--none of which has been shown on the website--that carries the same emotional power and creativity that have made Warren's project a phenomenon.
To mark the launch of My Secret, Warren is sharing with us seven postcards from the book that haven't been seen on the website. We'll post one card a day beginning on October 17 and ending on October 23, the day before My Secret is released. Come back every day and see what's new.
Yahoo builds digital time capsuleArchive to be sealed until 2020
Shaun Nichols in California, vnunet.com 11 Oct 2006
ADVERTISEMENTYahoo has kicked off a project to build a digital time capsule, allowing users to submit stories, photos, videos, artwork and poetry through the project's website.
The Yahoo Time Capsule submissions will be collected until 8 November, when it will be sealed and stored at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC.
Yahoo plans to reopen the digital archive in 2020 to mark the firm's 25th anniversary.
The capsule was designed by artist Jonathan Harris, and allows users to submit items under themes such as love, anger, fun and faith.
The Time Capsule website shows a rotating sphere containing pictures of the 100 most recent entries, as well as an index of all entries by theme. On the bottom of the page is a clock counting down the time remaining until the capsule is sealed.
The site also records submissions in several categories, including country, age, gender and theme.
In addition to contributing to the capsule, Yahoo is asking users to vote on how to distribute a $100,000 donation to be made by the company.
Before the capsule in sealed, Yahoo plans to project the content onto the side of the Pyramid of the Sun in Teotihuacán, Mexico.
But there was always some obstacle in the way, something to be gotten through first,
some unfinished business, time still to be served, a debt to be paid.
At last it dawned on me that these obstacles were my life.
This perspective has helped me to see there is no way to happiness.
Happiness is the way.
So treasure every moment you have and remember that time waits for no one.
Happiness is a journey, not a destination.
Name: Nathan Flood
What: digital artist / art director
Where: New York, NY
Looking at: nothing in particular
Listening to: fantomas, philip glass, kronos quartet, portishead, pink floyd, mogwai, nirvana, the doors, tricky, iron butterfly, lou reed, neil young, bob dylan
When walking in the halls of Milwaukee Art Museum you feel like exploring a 3D reality. It seems like the design of this building has never left computer, and every pixel and byte of an electronic record were somehow projected into the real world.
No Photoshop filters were applied. Contrast and brightness were adjusted in order to achieve a higher image quality.
See my other photos of MAM here and here
Santiago Calatrava, the architector
Uploaded by Hello Doodle! on 13 Jan '06, 7.52pm PST.
Vernissage: October 5, 6-8 pm Exhibition: October 6 - November 4, 2006 Place: ArteF Fine Art Photography Gallery, Spluegenstrasse 11, 8002 Zurich, Switzerland Opening Times: Tuesday - Friday 13-18, Saturday 11-16
(PRWEB) October 2, 2006 -- For the first time in Switzerland, ArteF Fine Art Photography Gallery presents selected works from the American “Grand Old Lady” of photography, Imogen Cunningham (1883-1976).
The exhibition premieres pictures from a private collection, which were only recently discovered. They stem in part from her early, pictorialist phase and have never before been publicly exhibited. With a total of 40 photographs, the exhibition depicts a cross-section of the artist’s multi-layered portfolio. Imogen Cunningham achieved fame with her poetic plant photographs and her sensitive portraits of prominent contemporaries, such as Gertrude Stein, Frieda Kahlo, Lionel Feininger or Hollywood stars like Cary Grant and Spencer Tracy. These works, as well as her then unconventional depictions of industry and architecture, made her name known far beyond American shores.
Inspired by Gertrude Käsebier, Imogen Cunningham began to take photographs in 1901. In connection with her chemistry studies, during which she was also intensively occupied with botany, she worked in the studio of Edward S. Curtis and learned to produce platinum prints. In 1909 she completed her training in photography at the Technische Hochschule (Technical College) in Dresden. Once back from Europe, she met Gertrude Käsebier and Alfred Stieglitz. In 1910 she opened her first studio in Seattle – an immediate success.
Cunningham’s creative phase, from 1901 to 1976, covers almost half of the time that has passed since the invention of photography. Thus her work is also interesting from a cultural perspective and in the context of art-history. Her pictures were important stimuli for many photographers (Magarethe Maler, Edward Weston and Anselm Adams amongst others). Her optical clarity quickly became recognized as an important development in photography; she was often described as sensitive and perspicacious at the same time.
Her sharply accentuated close-ups of plants and unconventional views of industrial sites and modern architecture are mainly created in the 1920s. Concentrating on light, form and abstract patterns, these photographs established her reputation as a pioneer of photographic modernism. She is a founder member of the f/64 group and continues to develop her style and techniques over the course of 70 years. Thus in the 30s and 40s she transfers the style of her plant photography to portrait photography and creates impressive portraits, full of precision. Her pictures of the dancer Martha Graham for Vanity Fair in 1932 establish her reputation as the foremost portraitist of her time. Between 1932 and 1934 she works for the magazine regularly in New York and Hollywood.
In the 50s Cunningham stretches her work in an almost post-modern way. She photographs people and plants, and places the negatives on top of one another in order to abstract her portraits. With the aid of double flash she produces a collection of psychologically impressive still-lifes. Many of her street photographs from the 60s demonstrate a connection with Dadaism and further developments in performance art. She spends the last years of her life in a photography studio on age. The profound yet lively portraits of old people are collected in the book “After Ninety”, published posthumously.
Cunningham was interested in the possibilities of storytelling and representation through the medium of photography. Most important for her was the possibility, through this medium, of bringing the photograph, object and viewer closer to one another. This task she allocated to the purely visual elements of photography: form, tonality and shading. Her mastery of nearly every photographic genre results from her knowledge of the formal elements of photography. Her observation of form leads to pictures which immerse themselves in each subject and, like lyric poetry, arouse emotions.
Imogen Cunningham knew that it is the details and the particular arrangement of formal elements which the biggest personalities, the most beautiful flowers and the most dramatic events display best of all. Time and again, persistently, she explored this relationship between the flexible world of experience and the formal world of photography, with intensity and with poetry.
BAS JAN ADER
The work of Bas Jan Ader will be the subject of a show at The Camden Arts Centre from the 28th April to 2nd of July, entitled All is Falling. Bas Jan Ader’s works are also currently included in MASQUERADE: Representation and the Self in Contemporary Art at The Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney from the 23rd of March to the 21st of May.
We are happy to announce that David Altmejd will represent Canada in next year's Venice Biennale. The curator of the pavillion is Louise Déry, director of the Galerie de l'UQAM.
The first monograph of the work of David Altmejd published by Galerie de Lquam is now available here at the gallery, please contact us if you would like to obtain a copy.
Kenneth Anger’s work was included in The Whitney Biennale which finished at 28th of May 2006.
Modern Art is please to announce that we now represent the artist Simon Bill, who completed his third solo show in Modern Art in May 2006.
Extrospective, a major museum survey of the work of Tom Burr opened at Musée Cantonal des Beaux-Arts de Lausanne on the 7th April and will run through until the 18th June. A major publication to coincide with the exhibition is printed and is available from the gallery. Tom Burr’s solo show at Modern Art opened on June 7th. His work will also be included in the exhibition Why Pictures Now? at Museum Moderner Kunst Stiftung Ludwig Wien which opens on the 8th of June. Two works by Tom Burr were recently acquired by the Museum Moderner Kunst Stiftung Ludwig Wien for their permanent collection.
A Portrait of Everything, a solo show by Nigel Cooke, just finished at the South London Gallery. The first major publication of the artist’s work has just been published by Modern Art in cooperation with Andrea Rosen Gallery and Koenig Books and is available from the gallery. Nigel Cooke’s work is also currently included in the exhibition Imagination Becomes Reality at Sammlung Goetz in Munich until June 3rd. In October Nigel Cooke will have a solo show at The Modern Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas. Nigel Cooke will have a solo show with Andrea Rosen Gallery in November of 2006.
The first publication of Barnaby Furnas’ work, published to coincide with his first UK institutional show in the summer of 2005 at the BALTIC ARTS CENTER in Newcastle is now available from the gallery.
Tim Gardner has just completed a residency at the National Gallery in London, which will result in a solo show at the museum in 2007. He had a solo show of new works at Modern Art in June 2006.
We are pleased to announce that we now represent the artist Phillip Lai who first showed with the gallery in 2000. Two pieces by Phillip Lai were recently acquired by the Arts Council.
Barry McGee exhibited an installation as part of Art Unlimited at Art Basel last June. A major installation by Barry McGee was recently acquired by the Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Castilla y León in Spain.
Following Jonathan Meese’s recent performance in the Turbine Hall at Tate Modern his major retrospective Mama Johnny opened at the Deichtorhallen Hamburg on the 28th of April. On April 27th and 28th the play Kokain with a stage setting by Jonathan Meese was performed at the Deichtorhallen. The play is by Frank Castorf with the ensemble of Volksbühne, Berlin. Jonathan also performed at Deichtorhallen on the 24th of May.
Alan Michael’s work was recently included in the Tate Triennal 2006, curated by Beatrix Ruff. His first catalogue has just been produced by Modern Art in cooperation with Hotel and is available from the gallery.
We are pleased to announce that we now represent British painter Katy Moran who will have her first solo show in Modern Art in October 2006.
Matthew Monahan’s work was included in both the Berlin Biennale 2006 as well as the Whitney Biennal 2006. He will have his first solo show with Modern Art in October 2006. Next year Matthew Monahan will also have a solo show at LA MOCA.
CLARE E. ROJAS
Clare E. Rojas recently had a solo show at the Ulrich Museum of Art, Wichita. At January 2007 Clare E. Rojas will have a solo show in Laboratorio 987 in the Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Castilla y León in Spain. At 2007 Clare will have a solo show at Museum Heit Domeijn, Sittard. Three paintings by Clare E. Rojas were recently acquired by the Museum Heit Domeijn, Sittard.
Eva Rothschild’s work was included in the Tate Triennal 2006, curated by Beatrix Ruff and was on view at Tate Britain until 14th May. Her work will be included in the exhibition Abstract Art-Now Strictly Geometrical at Wilhelm-Hack-Museum in Ludwigshafen from the 30th of July until the 24th September. Eva Rothschild’s work is also included in The British Art Show 2006 which is currently touring venues in the UK. In October she will have a solo show at Eva Presenhuber Gallery in Zurich. Eva’s work has recently been acquired by the Irish Museum of Modern Art.
Steven Shearer’s work was recently included in the Berlin Biennale. His work will be the subject of a major show at the Power Plant in Toronto later this year which will also travel to the Ikon Gallery in Birmingham. Shearer’s work was also featured in the exhibition Trial Ballons in the Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Castilla y León in Spain from the 6th of May till the 10th of September. He will have his first solo show with Modern Art in early 2007.
Collier Schorr’s work was recently included in the exhibition The Youth of Today at The Schirn Kunsthalle, Frankfurt, which continues until the 25th of June. Collier will have her second solo show with Modern Art in September 2006. Her solo show with the Badischer Kunstverein in Karlsruhe opens in early 2007. The artist’s latest book Jens F. has just been published by Steidl and is available from the gallery. Collier Schorr’s work has recently been acquired by the Guggenheim Museum.
Ricky Swallow will have his first UK solo show with Modern Art in November/December 2006. In early 2007 he will have a solo show with the Douglas Hyde Gallery in Dublin. His work is currently on view in a solo show entitled 'The Past Sure Is Tense',in the Art Gallery of Western Australia, in Perth.
TIM NOBLE & SUE WEBSTER
Tim Noble & Sue Webster’s work was included in the exhibition MASQUERADE: Representation and the self in contemporary Art at The Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney from the 23rd of March to the 21st of May. A major publication with Tim Noble and Sur Webster's work will be published by Rizzoli in September 2006.
Clare Woods will have a solo show at the Chisenhale Gallery, London, opening in September 5th and running through October. The exhibition will be accompanied by a catalogue with a text by Barry Schwabsky.
Modern Art will participate in Frieze Art Fair 2006 and Art Basel/Miami Beach 2006.
Stuart Shave/Modern Art
10 Vyner Street
Cat Chat is a Registered Charity. We are an internet based rescue resource, and support charity for cat rehoming centres across the UK.
Cat Chat was first launched in June 2000 by the 'founding felines', ex-rescue cats Gemini and George, with the aim of helping other cats in care to find a new home, and since then we've helped thousands of cats do just that. The current 'cats in charge' Gemini, Colonel Beau and Pickford are assisted by a small group of human trustees, and we are delighted to have two very special patrons: MP and lifelong animal lover, Roger Gale, and the wise and wonderful Chairman Bagpuss. Click Here to meet our Patrons.
As the internet has become an increasingly valuable rehoming resource, we soon realised that we were making a big difference to shelters and rescue groups across the UK, finding more homes for cats and kittens in their care. So, in 2003 we decided to become 'official', and became one of the very first internet-based charities to be registered in the U.K. (reg. no. 1100649).
We are now helping to find homes for hundreds of cats each month - a fact that we are extremely proud of! Check out our Rehoming Roll of Honour for a selection of recent homings »» Rehoming Roll of Honour.
Here's what CatChat said about PaulCooklin.com
Modern art for contemporary interiors. Beautiful pieces of modern, digital art for your home or office - choose by design or by colour. Spectacular, thought provoking, mood enhancing... well, take a look at the on-line gallery, it's quite an experience! And the gallery donates a percentage of each web sale to Cat Chat - thanks guys!
If you want to offer advice or share your thoughts with the masses, set yourself up with a blog. We show you how to get involved in this growing phenomenon
Anthony Dhanendran, Computeract!ve, 30 Sep 2004
From Samuel Pepys to Adrian Mole, we are all familiar with famous diaries. Many of us keep one, either to record our thoughts or to remind ourselves of what we have been doing. But would you like to see the contents published and read by thousands of people? Several million bloggers can answer that question affirmatively: they are already doing so.
Blogs - or weblogs, to give them their full name - are a kind of online journal or diary. Those who maintain blogs, known as bloggers, do so for various reasons: some have strong opinions, some have professional advice to impart, others are simply keen to share their lives online.
The weblog began as exactly that - a log of links published on personal websites. The links, which anyone could click on and view, gave people an easy way to access these little nuggets. From this, the idea of the weblog grew as people started adding comments to the items they published, or 'posted', on the internet. Nowadays, many blogs do not follow the original definition - in fact, they do not contain links at all - and are much more like online diaries.
It's very easy to set up a blog, and most are hosted by one of the many free blogging services such as TypePad or Blogger. Blogging software takes the hard work out of web publishing and makes it simple to create and update online content.
Blogs in the limelight
Some blogs have a readership equalling that of small newspapers and magazines. There are celebrity bloggers - both the already famous, including actors, musicians, journalists and politicians, and those who have become famous through their blogging exploits. The Baghdad Blogger, also known as Salam Pax, became famous during last year's war in Iraq when he was found to be posting dispatches from the centre of the battlefield. Eventually, he was given his own column by a British newspaper.
Blogs range from highly technical explorations of physics or engineering, to discussions of politics and the media, to gossip and personal diaries. The last category makes up the majority of current blogs. Creators range from the famous - such as actress Gillian Anderson and filmmaker Michael Moore - to the millions of people who keep blogs just to communicate with friends, family and, often, total strangers.
Blogs can be used to keep track of the activities of a social or charitable project, or a school, office or local sports team. Some blogs exist to inform readers of the progress of a project, be it the construction of a building or the development of a piece of software.
Many blogs do not have a definite purpose, and are there to keep the blogger's friends and family up to date with what they are doing. Because of the open nature of the internet, and the fact that blogs are indexed by Google and other search engines, bloggers often find their words being read by complete strangers.
For some this is part of the attraction, and many bloggers have built up substantial online followings. Some of these blogs are written anonymously, out of personal preference or because they discuss the blogger's work or personal life. Some bloggers have been fired from their jobs after their employers found out and disapproved of what they had written.
A tool for free speech
Blogs can also be a powerful voice. During the Chinese Government's 1989 crackdown on student protests, the outside world first found out about the events through students on the internet. Blogs have made it easier for people to have a voice and be heard. After the 11 September attacks in the US, when major news sites were swamped with users, many people turned to bloggers in New York to find out what was happening and talk about their reactions. Even Pepys has found himself online, courtesy of modern bloggers.
Many blogs allow users to comment on what has been posted, either anonymously or after having registered themselves with the website operator. This gives bloggers proof that they are being read, and provides readers with a chance to interact and discuss what they read. One development of this is the community weblog - a site with hundreds or even thousands of users, all of whom can post links or comment on other people's posts.
Most of these sites (such as www.metafilter.com and www.slashdot.com) are free to use, although some offer enhanced services for a small fee. When you're browsing through people's blogs, do remember that the internet is a forum for free speech and it isn't censored or filtered. Forthright opinions and strong language are the order of the day, although you can report anything illegal to the appropriate hosting company and authorities.
Blogging grew out of the desire to use the internet to communicate with other human beings, and the ability to do so easily and, in most cases, free of charge. Although there is a clear distinction between blogging, journalism and other forms of writing, blogs can provide a useful and often entertaining alternative view. If you want to rant online, or you have a story to tell, a blog is the perfect outlet.
Go get 'em
You can get involved in the world of blogging by signing up with one of the many blog hosting services on the internet. They range from basic free services to paid services that offer extra features. There are hundreds of hosting companies, which you can find through a web search, but we've given a brief overview of the most popular on the next page.
Once you have registered and logged in, the first step is to pick a name and select a graphical style from the templates provided. Some companies let you create your own style or modify those provided, while with others, you must stick to the pre-defined templates. Then comes the bit we can't help you with - the writing.
The blogging software gives you options to change the font, size and colour of the text, much like any word processor. You can also use the buttons provided to add links to websites you like, or blogs written by friends, as well as indents and pictures. Add a title, click on the button to publish, and your words will appear on the web. The world is waiting.
TOP OF THE BLOGS
One of the best-known services is TypePad, which is the one we at Computeractive use for our own blog. If you sign up with TypePad you are initially entitled to a 30-day free trial of its services, which includes up to 200MB of storage space and the allowance to post pictures. The basic service will then cost you $5 (£3) per month, which gets you 50MB of storage. Note that you will have to give your credit card details to set up an account, but you won't be charged if you cancel before the 30-day trial period is up.
Blogger is one of the oldest and most famous blogging services, and it's completely free. Along with its web-hosting service Blogspot, it's now part of the expanding Google empire. This might lead to some interesting future developments, but for now it's fairly easy to use and reasonably powerful. However, you don't get some of the features available in the paid-for TypePad service, such as a comments system so others can respond to your published thoughts. If you use Blogger, your blog can also be hosted on Blogspot - this means adverts from Google will appear at the top, which is how the service is paid for.
The biggest British blogging site is called 20six, and it offers a good set of features for its free service. You get a guestbook and comments system, and a similar easy-posting process to the other sites. If you find that the free service doesn't offer enough, you can upgrade to the paid-for services at either £3 or £7 per month. This gives you more blogs per user, more storage space and lots of other features.
LiveJournal is really more of an online diary service (hence the name) than a blog, but, semantics aside, it offers a similar service to the other blogging hosts here. Likewise, its posting system is easy to understand and undertake. The service includes a built-in comments system so your readers can talk back to you and give you their views on your posts.
The paid upgrade costs between $25 and $30 (£14 to £17) per year depending on how you choose to pay. With it, you get the option to customise your blog further, for example, by adding your name to the website address of the blog (yourname.livejournal.com, for example). You can also add posts by phone or email, among other services.
Radio, by the UserLand company, is a piece of software that you use on your home computer instead of accessing via the internet. The price - $40 (£23) per year - includes the cost of being hosted on the UserLand server and 40MB of storage.
In practice, it's very similar to the other services we have mentioned, with the familiar page templates and quick buttons for adding links and pictures. Because it's a piece of software rather than a website, you can use it to host a blog on your personal website if you prefer to use the webspace provided by your ISP. An added bonus for those on dial-up connections is that you can type in and edit your blog entry without being connected. When you log on to the internet, go to the Radio site to upload the formatted text.
The future of blogging
The humble blog has spawned a host of spin-offs. First, came the picture blog - pictures dropped into the text of a blog, or a display of images on their own. All the paid-for services and some free ones let you attach pictures to your blog. Then came the option to post entries by email and text message, giving bloggers the opportunity to make themselves heard from almost anywhere in the world.
Following on from audio blogging, where bloggers make a voice recording of themselves and post that instead of writing, the newest arrival on the scene is video blogging (or 'vogging'). This involves recording short snippets of video to add to text and pictures or to use instead of them. The point, say video bloggers, is not to try to replace TV, but to give ordinary people the opportunity to express themselves in ways in which, until now, they were not able to.
Video blogging can be as simple as using a cheap webcam or digital camera to record your message. It's then a matter of editing them if you wish and then posting the file online. The guide at http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/ can give you more information on how to video blog, and point you in the direction of some interesting vogs.